|
The International Residential Code (IRC 2021) Section 310.1 states: "Basements, habitable attics and every sleeping room shall have not less than one operable emergency escape and rescue opening. Where basements contain one or more sleeping rooms, an emergency escape and rescue opening shall be required in each sleeping room. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way, or to a yard or court having a minimum width of 36 inches (914 mm) that opens to a public way."
My building code official is reading this as sleeping rooms in attics and basements need an escape window. I am reading "Basements, habitable attics and every sleeping room " as a list of 3 without the use of an Oxford comma. Any sleeping room needs an escape window, right? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
6 Comments
There is a seemingly willful gap in information in scoping code (IBC) for small group R structures: those on the threshold of IRC/IBC: I am working on an existing 4 unit building where we do not have verified assembly information so the construction is assumed to be V-B.
The owner would like to renovate the existing basement, which is ~50% above grade, into an apartment with a new exterior exit. Three of the units share a common interior exit stairway & the upper ones are served by a fire escape. The 4th unit is built like a townhouse on the rear of the building and does not share any exit components. If an existing 4-unit residential building (currently not sprinkler protected) adds a 5th unit in the basement — and that unit does not share exit components — is there a code path that allows the project to proceed without installing sprinklers throughout the entire building? Or, a way to construct the new unit in an existing fire area in a way that does not increase risk (ie: 2-hour separation)? While the group is a trigger for requiring a system, looking at Chapter 5 as a scoping reference, the total fire area is below the threshold for a sprinkler system in group R-2 with V-B construction. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe My coworker and I are disagreeing about townhomes.
Can each townhouse (3 total) have its own NFPA 13D system? Or do they need to have one total system? Each townhouse has a 1-hr separation in the form of UL U347. I cannot find anything that says they can't each have their own, but he is saying he can't find anything to say they can, to which I have always said if it doesn't say no, then it's usually allowed. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are on the AHJ side, and Middle Housing requirements are on their way to increase density and reduce the cost of housing in our area. This will allow existing single-family residences to subdivide their lots, which may have up to four additional dwelling units on a parcel.
In anticipation of this, we are exploring options for residential fire sprinkler requirements beyond our already existing code for these small, ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit) type structures of 1,000 sqft maximum. We would like to maximize the possibilities of this by making the process as easy and inexpensive as possible. One avenue we are interested in is allowing for P2904 flow through sprinkler systems (Section P2904 of the IRC, prescriptive standard for one- and two-family dwellings) that can be installed by a plumber. We are open to omitting the fire plan review process and possibly even a bucket test, but still inspect for head placement, tenting, etc. What are your thoughts? Has anyone looked at this with any degree of success? We would love to hear any feedback you could provide. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Imagine you have a 6-unit, true townhouse-construction building covered by the 2018 IRC under construction. It has an NFPA 13D sprinkler and a one-hour separation between units, but there is one common closet for the sprinkler riser and domestic water main. This closet is accessed only through a door on the exterior and is under the control of the landlord, not the tenant.
What is the code path to require any fire separation between that closet and the dwelling units? There is no dog house off the side. The IRC only seems to call out separation between units, and even if you go into the IBC, it is not apparent. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe There always seems to be controversy about residential sprinklers in the garage.
I recently came across a section in the 2018 IRC under Section 309.5 and it states that private garages shall be protected by fire sprinklers (must be residential or quick response, designed to 0.05 gpm/sqft density) where the exterior wall has been designed based on Table 302.1(2) Note A. This table addresses minimum fire resistance ratings for exterior walls. Note (a) allows fire separation distance for non-rated exterior walls and projections to be reduced to 0-feet, unlimited openings and penetrations, with a setback, where residential subdivisions are all sprinklered. While looking at that table, I am not sure how to verify on the sprinkler plans if the garage meets that design method. I have started asking the contractor to add a note on the plans regarding the design method and if they use this table and note to design the wall then sprinklers are required in the garage. How would you interpret this section for compliance? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I'm an AHJ and I know many plan reviewers and inspectors in my area are new to the trade.
Does anyone have recommendation(s) for good plan review checklists or tools for plan review that would be helpful to rookie and intermediate-level plan reviewers? Thanks in advance. Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Have a 4-story townhouse, sprinklered in accordance with 13R.
Is a sprinkler at the top of an elevator shaft an acceptable trade off for a 1-hour rating of the shaft (in lieu of a 2-hour rating)? NFPA 13R, 2013 Section 6.6.6 says sprinklers are not required in non-combustible elevator shafts in accordance with ANSI 17.1. The state is says they will not certify the elevator/does not require a certificate in a residential elevator, so there is no confirmation that the elevator code is upheld. If the sprinkler is an acceptable trade off (or if the sprinkler is elected to be installed in excess of the code requirements) is then a shunt trip and flow switch/heat detector required to shut off power in the event of a sprinkler activation? Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe |
ALL-ACCESS
SUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop April '26 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
April 2026
PE PREP SERIES |
RSS Feed
